Memo- Street Reconstruct
Public Works Department
Memorandum
To:
Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From:
Steven C. Mielke, City Manager
Steve Stadler, Public Work!; Director ~
Copy:
Date:
February 6, 1997
Subject:
Street Reconstruction Policy
Background
In August, 1996 City staff met with Interlach€:n residents whose property abutted streets that
were proposed for 1997 reconstruction. It was soon apparent that the current street
reconstruction policy, calling for concrete curb & gutter or raised asphalt pavement edge, was
extremely unpopular with most Interlachen residents. Staff then requested approval for a
neighborhood-wide street design public input process. It was decided at the Sept 17th Council
Meeting that Council and staff should take a c:loser look at the existing policy and discuss options
at a future worksession. The proposed 1997 Interlachen street reconstruction project was
deferred. The street policy discussion was scheduled for the Feb 11th worksession and the
attached letters were sent to Interlachen resid,ents.
;.
Primary Issues
. Current Street Policy and past application of this policy
. Benefits of concrete curb & gutter
. Costs of curbs or asphalt edges
. Aesthetics
. Options & Staff Recommendation
Attachments
. Analysis ofIssues
. Roadway Improvement Policy excerpt
. Letters to Interlachen Residents
. Written responses from Interlachen Residents
. Telephone responses
. Curb & Gutter pamphlet
. Photographs
..
Analysis ofIssues
Current Street Policy and past application of this \)olicy
The current policy has been in effect since 1990. The policy requires streets to be reconstructed
with concrete curb & gutter unless the neighborhood presents a petition of not less than 55% of
the affected property owners requesting raised asphalt edge. Raised asphalt edge shall be installed
wherever concrete curb and gutter is not used. Design modifications shall be established as
appropriate to address drainage and maintenance concerns. The policy doesn't require a certain
curb and gutter design. A.s you know, the City has used several different styles in its street
projects.
The current policy has been used in the following street reconstruction projects:
Hobby Acres neighborhood - 1990
Campbell neighborhood - 1991
Knollwood neighborhood - 1992
Westbrooke East neighborhood - 1993
Oak Ridge South neighborhood - 1994
Campbell neighborhood - 1996
Each of the above street projects included installing concrete curb & gutter where none previously
existed. There were objections to the use of <:urb and gutter in each of the above projects, The
level of objection varied and the reasons for opposition included increased cost and/or undesirable
appearance.
Staff polled ten other Metro-area cities for inJbrmation on their street policies. Nine of those
cities require concrete curb & gutter when a street is reconstructed. Several go even further by
requiring i 6 inch vertical curb and 18 inch gutter. Minnetonka offers a 4 - 4.5 inch raised asphalt
edge option on local residential streets only.
Benefits of concrete curb and gutter
. Extends pavement life by protecting edge:! and preventing water intrusion into base
. Improves safety by defining the pavement edge for pedestrians and drivers. Curbs help drivers
know where to park.
. Is cost-effective over the life of the street
. Prevents weeds growing into and through pavement at edges
. Aids in street cleaning
. Improves drainage, especially on relatively flat streets
. Improves the effectiveness of future maintenance on the street
(cracksealinglsealcoatsloverlays)
Costs of curbs or asohalt edges
The average cost of installing concrete curb &. gutter is $6 - $7/foot. The average assessed cost
to homeowners is $4.20 - $4.90/foot or $210 - $245 for a 50 foot lot. For comparison purposes,
the assessment rate for all reconstruction co~ts on the 1996 street reconstruction project was
$33 - $43/foot or $1,650 - $2,150 per 50' lot.
The cost of installing the raised asphalt edge ill considerably less than concrete curb &. gutter.
However, in most instances 4" subsurface drain pipe would be needed under the edge of the
pavement. The cost ofmstalling 4" subsurface drain pipe is $4 - $7/foot. (We paid $7/foot on
the 1996 residential street project) The combined cost of asphalt edge and drain pipe would equal
or exceed the cost of concrete curb and gutter.
Aesthetics
This is a subjective matter, of course. I would bet that there are some residents in the Knollwood,
Hobby Acres, or other neighborhoods who WClre initially opposed to concrete curb and gutter but
are now pleased with the appearance of the concrete edges. I'm also sure some would still prefer
no curb &. gutter.
In considering aesthetics, we shouldn't solely consider the initial appearance that the concrete
edges provide. We should also consider the general appearance of the street 15 - 30 years after
the reconstruction project. I firmly believe that concrete curb &. gutter allows us to better
maintain a street throughout its life by: ensuring there is much less standing water, preventing
pavement edge failures, fewer patches, etc. I contend that by being able to more effectively
maintain the streets we also help maintain better looking neighborhoods.
Options
1. Stay with the current policy.
2. Revise the policy to allow streets to be reconstructed without concrete curbs or raised
asphalt edges if some percentage of the affected residents or neighborhood requests it.
3. Same as 2., but also raise the assessment rate above the current 70% to offset higher future
City maintenance costs.
4. Same as 2. or 3. above, but also reserve: the right to assess the cost of future maintenance
such as cracksealing, sealcoating and overlays.
5. Revise the policy such that all street reconstruction will include concrete curb &. gutter
installation.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends option 5. The City has applied the current policy, using some style of concrete
curb and gutter, on many past residential street projects. There was varying degrees of opposition
with each of these past projects. Staff feels that our current flexibility on curb design and
appearance is a reasonable compromise position. We've been able to maintain the distinctive
character of each neighborhood area and adequately provide for drainage and future maintenance.
Staff is confident that the same positive resultB can be achieved on future projects in the remaining
"uncurbed" areas of the City. The raised asphalt alternative is undesirable as the edges cannot
hold up to snowplow blades and the cost with subsurface drainage is very close to concrete curb
and gutter.
.~-
.
.?-
I'
-
-LPM - Policy #8-B
Page 5
8.
8.01
8.02
>
8.03
~
EXCERPT - ROADWAY IMPROV~lENT POL~CY
LOCAL STREETS
Local Streets are generally streets which service a small area and do not typically involve a movement of
traffic between areas. Local streets typically connect two collector streets or county roads. Streets of this
type include local streets, cul-de-sacs, and service roads. Loca1 streets within the City of Hopkins are
constructed with a minimum capacity of 7 tons per axle. The primary source of funding of local streets is
special assessments.
New local streets shall be constructed with curb and gutter. When reconstructing streets concrete curb
and gutter shall be installed where currently in use, and in other areas unless the neighborhood presents
a petition of not less than filly-five percent (55%) of the affected property owners requesting raised
asphalt edge.
Raised asphalt edge shall be installed wherever concrete curb and gutter is not used. Design
modifications shall be established as appropriate to address drainage and maintenance concerns.
New local street minimum unobstructed street width, (face-face of curb) is 30 feet. The standard
unobstructed street width for reconstruct(:d streets shall De 26 feet. Streets which do not meet this
requirement shall be reconstructed at current v.idth (unless a v.ider street is desired by the affected
residents) but not less than twenty feet (20') unless the Council finds that:
A twenty foot (20') width would adversely affect trees or other significant or desirable physical
features: and
A reduced width would not constitute a distinct hazard to life or property.
Factors to be considered shall include, but not be limited to, safe access of emergency vehicles, snow
storage requirements, availability of parking, and aesthetics.
8.04 Streets which are twenty-six feet (26') or more in v.idth will have parking allowed on both sides. Streets
less than twenty-six feet (26') in width may be subject to parking restrictions on an "as needed" basis.
Parking restrictions could be established a1 the time of street projects or at any future date based upon
general City parking requirements. '
Factors to be considered shall include, but not be limited to, staff report regarding safety and emergency
vehicles access and neighborhood input.
Where streets are less than twenty-six feet (26') in width, the staff shall assist the neighborhood in
identifying areas where existing street v.idth can be increased to provide additional parking.
9. ALLEYS
"
9.01 Alleys are minor roadways which service parcel> of property along the rear property line. The primary
'source of funding of alleys is special assessments.
9.02 All alleys shall be concrete construction. Alley width is generally 10 feet in residential areas and 12 feet
in commercial ares.
o
c
T Y
o F
H 0 p~ KIN S
o
OFFICE CF THE MAYOR
January 21,1997
Interlachen Park Residents
Re: Street Reconstruction Policies-lnterlachen Park
Dear lnterlachen Park resident:
In 1996, the City Council discussed the potential of reconstructing several streets in Interlachen
Park. They include:
. Preston Lane from Ashley Road to Homedale Road,
. Ashley Road from Boyce street to Excelsior Boulevard, and
. Holly Road from Goodrich Street to the dead end. .
~uring deliberations, the City Council placed on hold-the reconstruction of these streets while the
~ouncil reviewed its policy on roadway improvements. The current policy calls for reconstructed
streets to be constructed with concrete curb and gutter, unless the neighborhood presents a petition
of not less than 55 percent of the affected property owners requesting raised asphalt edge. During
the reviewp'tocess it became clear that the new Council members and the residents in Interlachen
Park were uncomfortable with the curtent policy language, and the Council decided to revisit the
policy.
Prior to the adoption of any changes to the curront policy, the City will ask for your input and advice.
The first meeting to discuss the existing policy ill scheduled for February 11, 1997. This work shop
session will be an introduction to the current policy, and a discussion about the pros and cons of the
current language. A number 'of alternatives will be discussed. for alternative language as well. From
there the Council will direct the item either to an additional work session or to a formal Council
meeting where possible adoption of the existing or different language would occur. Please be
assured that we value your input, and that you <Ire important to the decision making process.
You will be provided with additional information about the Council's schedule in the near future, and
we look forward to receiving your comments and suggestions;
/
Sincerely,
~ 4. (}f;~~
&harles D. Redepenning ?
Wfv1ayor
Inter1achen
1010 First Street South, Hopkins. Minnesota 55343 612/935-8474
An Equal Opportunity Employer
C I T Y
o F
HOPKINS
January 28,1997
InterIachen Park Residents
Re: Additional infonnation on Street Reconstruction Policy
Dear InterIachen Park resident:
This letter is being sent as a follow-up to Mayor Redepenning's Jan 21 letter.
As mentioned in the Mayor's letter, City Council will be discussing existing
street reconstruction policy at a February 11 tit City Council Work session.
The work session will be held in the Raspberry Room located in the lower
level of City Hall, 10 I 0 1 st Street South. The discussion on Hopkins' street
reconstruction policy is scheduled to begin at 7:30 p.m.
The discussion will be centered on City-wide street reconstruction policy as it
relates to pavement design, curb and gutter and possible alternatives to the
existing policy. I've attached excerpts from the current policy and some
detailed drawings on the curbing alternatives mentioned in the policy. The
work session is not intended for disl;:ussion on whether or not certain streets
should be reconstructed in the Inter] achen Park neighborhood. It is intended
to discuss alternative street reconstruction design standards/policy for future
street projects, including InterIachell and other neighborhood streets.
If you have questions, please give me a call at 939-1338. If you cannot
attend the meeting but want to express your opinion, feel free to call me.
Sincerely,
"
1",
Steven J. Stadler
Public Works Director
enc.
1010 First Street South Hopkins. Minnesota 55343
Phone: 612.935.8474 Fax: 612.935-1834
An Equal Opportunity Employer
~
~'.-
~
U'M - t'oncy i9'1s-!:l
~age 5
EXCERPT - ROADWAY Il1PROVEHENT POLJ;CY
8. LOCAL STREETS
8.01 Local Streets are generally streets which service a small area and do not typically involve a movement of
traffic between areas. Local streets typically connect two collector streets or county roads. Streets of this
type include local streets, cul-de-sacs, and service roads. Local streets within the City of Hopkins are
constructed with a minimum capacity of 7 tons per axle. The primary source of funding of local streets is
special assessments.
r.-
'-..
8.02
>
8.03
~
I!f1
8.04
New local streets shall be constructed with curb and gutter. When reconstructing streets concrete curb
and gutter shall be installed where currently in use, and in other areas unless the neighborhood presents
a petition of not less than fifty-five percellt (55%) of the affected property owners requesting raised
asphalt edge. .
Raised asphalt edge shall be installed wherever concrete curb and gutter is not used. Design
modifications shall be established as appropriate to address drainage and maintenance concerns.
New local street minimum unobstructed :;treet "idth, (face.face of curb) is 30 feet. The standard
unobstructed street "idth for reconstructed streets shall De 26 feet. Streets which do not meet this
requirement shall be reconstructed at current "idth (unless a "ider street is desired by the affected
residents) but not less than twenty feet (20') unless the Council finds that:
A twenty foot (20') "idth would adversely affect trees or other significant or desirable physical
features: and
A reduced width would not constitute: a distinct hazard to life or property.
Factors to be considered shall include, but not be limited to, safe access of emergency vehicles, snow
storage requirements, availability of parking, and aesthetics. '
Streets which are twenty-six feet (26') or mOre in "idth "ill have parking allowed on both sides. Streets
less than twenty-six feet (26') in width may be subject to parking restrictions on an "as needed" basis.
Parking restrictions could be established at lhe time of street projects or at any future date based upon
general City parking requirements. '
Factors to be considered shall include, but tlot be limited to, staff report regarding safety and emergency
vehicles access and neighborhood input.
Where streets are less than twenty.six feet (26') in width, the staff shall assist the neighborhood in
ident.if)ing areas where existing street "idth can be increased to prO\ide additional parking.
9. ALLEYS
'.
9,01 Alleys are minor roadi'ays which service parcel. of property along the rear property line. The primary
'source of funding of alleys is special assessments.
9.02 All alleys shall be concrete constructio~. Alley "idth is generally 10 feet in residential areas and 12 feet
in commercial ares.
.. ,.
~.
.:~~-;.~,.~.:'::*. '.
_ _ ..._ _n__ ,
. '.-.-"'~~:'-'..:::..'-:_-'-~--
.
,
::r:J
- "-
-,- I :E
r.-,
.:=
'.' !
.'
(f) :
c: -.
. III
()
c: : 0
-l 0 C>
:> "-l
(f) " 8
z .."
m : -l z
m n
0 '"
t'j
m : ,..,
0 '"
L--{ n
f-+- c:
rf) '"
'"
--- '. ";
:;;
Ir-r: t'j
3:
'"
z
,..,
.... "
9 Ii t:>
.... '. 0 ""
() III "'- b '"
;=i Ii H
r - N C')
c.,~ III III -.: z
:> ;=i '. ."
:> -l
C') (f) =E
C') m
.~ m
;:J B: :> ..
III Z ;JJ ,
:> 0 ~
(f) ~ B: t
m z .'..
p..) 0 .:.\
Co) 0
Co) -l
-= p..)
Co)
.,.
-=
~()O:l
(f)c:0'l
m:Il.... ~ ::u
mille:>
gl(Og--- "-
-- ::E
~C')z
-c:()
'-l;JJ
(f)-lm
-1"T1-1
:::1m
J
6" CONCRETE CURB DETAIL
3" R 1/2" R
... TT
.
6"
3" R . -1
T SLOPE 3/4" per ft
.. 4
. ~
~ . 131/2"
. .
7" . ..
I ..
..
.
.
-L . .. 4
A
SLOPE 3/4" per ft. .. .
I: 18" 1 l t 8" ~I
26" .
8618
Concrete
Cu Yds. L/F Per
Perl/F Cu Yd.
0.0582 17.2
.:." '-.
. - -"',.- ....
. .'. ". ." .
....
SlOPE 3/4- per ft.
T
7"
I
-L
SLOPE 3/4- per ft.
I:
..
..
~
..
.
6" CONCRETE CURB DETAIL
..
..
...
. .
18-
26-
8618
Concrete
Cu. Yds. L/F Per
Per L1F Cu. Yd.
0.0582 17.2
;:
"
0:
:z:
'"
H
'"
~
A
E-<
:z:
~
z
~
!;;:
""
~
'"
A
"-l
oJ +-t-
E-<
--'
;::;
E:
'"
<::
A
"-l
--'
--'
o
""
;:
"
c::
~
,...
'<:
M
C'l ~
,...
;- M
0 M
0 C'l
:z ;- ILl
6 0 CI)
0 c:::
c: :z CJ
<:: ~ c::
.' w 0
:: w
.. CIl 0
;- ....: < <
!.:.. '.
"- a Cl L')
N 1-. c: .J
0 Cl U
0 "-
'. ,... 1-. ia
. ,...
"
'.
---
.'
~
I-
!.:..
....
N
q
o
c
UJ
C
UJ
UJ
Z
CIl
<
;-
:;)
u
c
:;)
CIl
.c
'"
."" '"
" P-
.""
.0 P-
'"
" .
"""
'"
'" <!J
" P-
o
" "
."" 'rl
" <1l
" '"
"''0
'rl
.0 '"
eo
: '0
""" <!J
"
~
o
~r--.
~~
~
H~
~O
p.::~
p..,
en~
~O
::r::
~en
~
en::
H-,q
~'-./
H
H
~
'"
'"
gj
::>
u
'"
u
'"
'"
'"
H
<:
'"
""
en
<:
'"
'"
Vl
H
<:
""
\...
I
OJ
.........
r-
en
6{)
CO
-0
E't:
::J :J
~(f)
CO
,
%.
CC
I
.q.
11'7 ..Z
~.
o
O~
~O
~
E-4~
~O
:r::>z.<
P-<
w~
<0
::r::
ow
~
w::
H~
~'-/
>-'
H
<
[-;
'"
p
~
;:l
u
'"
u
p
'"
[-;
>-'
;:;
0:
en
<:
p
'"
en
H
<:
""
\...
.
a)
.........
yo-
(l)
:J~
go
,- c
E't:
::J :J
:t:::<.n
CD
.l
r.
o:l
IV
IIi] ..6
;:
"
0::
~
,...
'<:'
'"
<'{ ~
,...
...:/ f- '"
0 '"
0 N
., f-
:." Z W
~ 0 ~
0
c::: Z c::l
<( :i: c:
., w - "
:: w "
:z Ci1
'-' f- r: <( <
H L<. '. 2i c:l It')
tfl "- r:
'" N ~ ..J
'" 0 2i u
ci "-
E-< '. ,... N io
:z ,...
= -
~
'"
~
0..
'"
"" '. ---
=:>
u <J-I ~
'" A
E-<
'"
"" 0
u .- w
:z a
0 w
u f- l:J W
'" L<. Z f-
,..J ...... (I) w
'" '" '. ,<( c:::
<:
E-< 0 : f- U
z ci ~ Z'
=:> u ocr
0 ul==
;;;; " c:l
~ wf-
: (I) ..J~
Clt!J
i5o<s
ZCl
~c:::
o~
:i:u
;:
"-
0::
-
S'8~ OvSO'O
'PA 'n~ .:111 Jad
Jad.:lll 'sPA 'n~
alaJ::luo~
ajqeluno\^j
~9l
v
...
.4
...
~
~
v
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
'C'\
Co'\
"~
0::\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
.g~
1 f"
~
6
.
.,
..
;;;/8 i--
I
I
I
I
'<-
I
I
I
I
~IVI~a ~n~ ala~~NO~ a~[vL~~OW
,~L
.
r'
,.
,
I
1
I
1:0
["
I&'J
1 .
I
I
1
f
I
I
1
I
I
J
I
...
~ I
T
.L
1
I
I
I
I
I.~
IT \.
. \ .
. \
. \
.~!L-9 . \
+- .~l=8'
II','\'
100.:1 83d
.M 3d018
/
,
?
:>-
HOlm TABLE CONCRETE CURB DETAIL
I
1
1
1
1
I
1
1
1
1
1
.1
<r>1
'::'1
0:/
I
1
I
,
--=
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
J
I
I
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
J
>1
I
I I
I I
T{ . ----------~
. . .J ' . to.
..
7" ..
4
.
...
/
SLOPE 1/4"
PER FOOT
12~
o
. r..
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\::S)
'\.
\~
\,-""
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
3/4"
. .
.\ IT
, R \. 12" '. f 10-1/2"
\ . 6-1/2"
· .'\<11
4 \
:"
e
4
..
..
..
..
..
'"
Q'
16~
:~8"
Mountable
Concrete
Cu. YdB, L/F per
per L/F Cu. Yd.
0.0540 18.5
t~-""-'''''
Mr. & Mrs. Erling E. Rice
Summer
248 Meadowbrook Rd
Hopkins, MN 55343 ' ~
(612) 935-8249
l-~l-ctl
Winter
259 S, Beach Rd
Hobe Sound, FL 33455
(407) 546-7080
_ . T
1<> /71.
LAir (!~pA)c~.'p
~~AI';
ov U' ..,
k >Ji",~ __ 0/1"7 ~ /Nr~" .~
~~~~'
~ q' ~r~ dr""J'4P ~)
<fw~ 70~-- ~,-,,<.e ~ 5'r~~ .
i~dr~~fla_~~
;;-'ledl1Z. 'f1.:r ~1/ ~ z:4-~.
~~ "Y " &.u...t.... /!-<- ~ "",.>?o
~4-~~~,f ~ta-/,'
~~rc4 .
;').1? m.??~.~- ,1. ~
&n cfo
~s.
Y'
~~,
-
hv--' " ~~- r/~'
:.~4 vcVv f~ . "
.~~1~~T
(~~,. ....'
._, A~_?7~~~~.~JC~ /Q..~-,
~~~p~:~~~.
~~.,~ ~/,~~
.- ~~r~' -'. ~~
), / ~ (j .
, I
. ' r
~~i, ". '~'.'
~~ ~~~;;z:t-
~~.~J.~~~~
~ ~ ,~~ ~~~~~// &- ~
, ~ . '~--d"
~~~ ~r..~/J L5 ~ ~
flo...r.~~L.. _ IP~ ~ ~~ ~
dLL ~.i~ ~"J ,.<1 - . - {} --.~
/ ~. ~~ ~
. . ~ '. ,--./',.
, fP~~~~U~~~/.
. j~~ .
'.. .,J ~~~~ ~~.
~~~:i~ . .;.
. '-'--l" ~,?"'" --;6 ~ ./ A L
t. -\~3' ~,,_{~
1" ~ --, ._~ V~
~!{C=~-, j~ ~
'i~;: . .~>(/ '. .~
e~.4't~,~~' ."
-f), . '~;~~f_~~' > ~---~
.' ~, . ?7 ' -z;r - - . ~~ - . .
~o...V:"'~ .~ ~ ~ ~ ' . .
.......r:.:,:'.~;L/td,. ,~
.~~. W'" '.' ~~~.:t~~A',4- ~
~'.,.'~~~" t7 {"r I~ 'i~, . ~o~
~ ~~~~J
~=2~'q7
~'
"
-
.
Patricia G. Nichols
1280 Colonial Drive
Lexington, Kentucky 40504
January 24, 1997
Charles D. Redepenning, Mayor
1010 First Street South
Hopkins, Minnesota 55343
Dear Mayor Redepenning:
I write this letter to ask you to support us and other residents of Interlachen Park in
our stand against an unwanted. unneeded street reconstruction project which will mean a
substantial tax increase for homeowners to pay for installation of curbs and a new water
system - unnecessary "improvements" aCI:ording to all those residents currently expressing
serious concern about rising costs. As the mayor of Hopkins, your opinion is important to
us, and we hope you consider the residents' opinions important as well.
My future husband (John E. Pauly) and I became the owners of a home located at
200 Holly in Interlachen Park in August, 1995. Soon after our purchase, we embarked on
an extensive remodeling project which will be finished in late summer when we plan to
move in. Attracted to Interlachen Park by its quiet, country-like atmosphere, it seems to us
tp be an ideal place to live after retirement. Close to town and its conveniences, yet
protected from future development, it is truly one of the fmest neighborhoods in the Twin
Cities area. As with the purchase of any home, this was not a quickly-made decision.
I am no stranger to Hopkins and Interlachen Park. My mother and father lived in a
house on Holly Road for several years after my brother and I were born and eventually built
the second house to be constructed in Hobby Acres in 1941. Country dirt roads and
raspberry fields were everywhere then. I kept my horse at the old Campbell Farm and rode
in Raspberry Festival parades, in shows at the Henn. Co. Fairgrounds, and all over
Hopkins and most of St. Louis Park. After graduation from the University, I taught at the
old Harley Hopkins school (gone now) and later at Morningside School (also gone) in
Edina. My marriage in 1960 to a horse trainer took me first to Missouri, then to a farm we
bought in St. Charles, Illinois (40 miles west of Chicago), then to Lexington, Kentucky,
where I took a position in 1985 as Executive Secretary of the American Saddlebred Horse
Association; my husband died in 1994, fc)llowing a long illness. Many life changes must be
accepted, but experiences in different ar"as of the country have convinced me that places of
natural beauty are becoming a rarity and should be recognized and preserved wherever
possible by local governments and the p,'ople of the community.
What worries Jack and me most is the lack of information we have received about
this proposed construction and possible tax increase. We would appreciate your taking the
time to state your position to us directly and perhaps to explain if these "improvements" are
really needed and are worth raising taxe!: on residents' property to pay for them.
Sincerely,
p~ IJ. I,:(i-~ I ;btv-,... E. L_.
Patricia G. Nichols & John E. Pauly -. -7
INTERLACHEN RESIDENT TELEPHONE RESPONSES
Name/Address
Comments on street policy
Ms. Marianne Sweeney
35 A.sWey Road
Against curb & gutter
Mr. Schwappach
157 Holly Road
Against curb & gutter
Mr. Bob Tickel
248 Hawthorne
Important to maintain neighborhood
character - reconstruct as-is unless
residents want different
Mr./Mrs. Swanson
249 Interlachen Road
Would accept surmountable curb
Ms. Mulvehill
209 A.sWey Road
Against curb & gutter
.
KNOLLWOOD NEIGHBORHOOQ STREET
.
..' .-
CAMPBELL NEIGHBORHOOD STREET
.
.
..
CITY OF HOPKINS
BURNES DRIVE
.
CITY OF MINNETONKA
RAISED ASPHALT EDGE
RAISED ASPHALT EDGE
EXPOSED AGGREGATE SURMOUNTABLE CURB DESIGN - CITY UNKNOWN
'!1,
._---~'
.
/
- .-
EXANPLES OF PAVEMENT EDGE DETERIORATION
.